To login to Connect now, click "Login" in upper right.
There are currently 0 users online.
Did the meeting with GPO at DLC happen? Or do I need to try again on a conference call? Amy
Laura set up the meeting and took notes but has been ill.
John A. StevensonAssociate Librarian, Student Multimedia Design CenterUniversity of Delaware Library302 firstname.lastname@example.org
Apologies for the delay, but I've been waylaid with the flu... Please take a look at the minutes to see if there are gaps or mistakes... Thanks.
User Experience & Assessment Librarian
Assistant Professor of Library Services
James C. Kirkpatrick Library
University of Central Missouri
Thanks for organizing the meeting and taking notes Laura! Much appreciated. Will make the notes public and post to email@example.com unless I hear objections by the end of the day today...Amy
Hi all, Apologies for the delay, but I've been waylaid with the flu... Please take a look at the minutes to see if there are gaps or mistakes... Thanks. - L
Agenda for GODORT/GPO Communications – October 19, 2009
1. PURL Server: What happened and what steps are being taken to prevent a recurrence of similarly catastrophic hardware & software failures? 10 minutes. Amy West.
James Mauldin from GPO responded…
There was a hardware failure on August 24th, 2009 of the PURL server using 2.05 software. GPO maintains monthly backups of the entire server, so they were able to rebuild the entire system. There was a problem with the system not being robust enough to handle the upload of the PURL data fast enough to meet the demand of requests to the server. GPO now has two servers for the PURL system and they are now doing weekly backups.
Two weeks ago, the system again went down for about two hours when GPO tested the back server and discovered a bad nic card. A new card has been installed and the problem was resolved.
The plan forward will be to move the second back up server to an office site location. James mentioned that OCLC no longer maintains the PURL software, however, GPO is considering moving to 3.0, but there is currently no timeline for when this may occur.
2. Relating to the purl server. The purl server provides statistics based on the IP where the person is coming from. How accurate are the statistics? I've noticed some possible discrepancies with the stats. 5 minutes. Jesse Silva.
Ted Priebe from GPO responding…
It was mentioned that dynamic IP addresses may affect the PURL statistics as the statistics are gathered off of IP addresses not from the catalog URL. Karen and Joe have mentioned that if there are more than 3 URLs use a subnet IP to get more accurate statistics for online government information use. It was explained that there is a process for taking the IP log files to get the numbers that are displayed on the webpage.
Jesse Silva mentioned that his experience is that those numbers captured by GPO seem to low. Ted stated that this is important to know as it gives GPO a sense of how quickly they need to design critical requirements for the transition technology from PURLS to whatever takes its place. Ted suggested that we provide some catalog URLs for GPO to test in order to determine if there is a problem, and if so what it is and how to resolve it. Jesse Silva has volunteered to work with Ted and whomever else to test the PURL statistics.
3. Will GPO catalogers resume use of field 538 to record the URLs of online electronic resources in GPO-created records at the time of cataloging? BIBCO rules adopted by GPO suggest that this field is mandatory for archived resources. During the PURL server failure, URLs recorded in this field assisted users in accessing resources. No monographic electronic resource records created by GPO since August include notes offering any indication of where the online resource may be found. 10 minutes. John Stevenson.
JOHN STEVENSON PROVIDED CORRECTIONS TO THE NOTES, WHICH HAVE BEEN ADDED AS OF 11/03/2009:
Laurie Hall from GPO responding…
As of August 1st, 2009, GPO changed its cataloging policy to conform to BIBCO rules and stopped recording the URL where the resource was originally found in field 538. John Stevenson mentioned that he saw in the BIBCO rules that a 538 field is mandatory. GPO staff acknowledge this and will need to determine what best avenue to take. It will take several months to resolve a variety of issues, including the CGP, what effects it will have on OCLC records, vendor records (Marcive), etc. [At the operational issues forum later in the conference, Library Services & Content Management Bibliographic Control Manager Jennifer K. Davis provided the additional detail that URLs recorded in field 538 were displaying in an "ugly" way in CGP, potentially causing further problemsor confusion.]
Laurie Hall also said there have been questions as to whether there should be multiple 856s in GPO catalog records. When GPO catalogers adapt records input by others, they do not delete non-PURL URLs from records in OCLC, however, they do not include the additional URLs in the records they import into CGP. These practices lead to differences between the records in CGP (PURL-only) and OCLC and vendor-supplied records, which may include multiple 856 fields.
Laurie Hall also stated that GPO is considering a change to their practice for monographic titles of pointing each PURL to the agency website until the resource is gone and then redirecting the PURL to an archived copy on GPO's permanent access server. Under the proposal, the PURL would point to the GPO archived version from the beginning. She also noted that PURL numbers are being assigned to catalogers in batches in order to speed up the cataloging process with two series of PURL numbers now in use: the original, with numbering such as LPS12345 and a new one beginning with FDLP100.
4. Does GPO still plan on migrating to a handle system? Has there been discussion of GPO joining LOCKSS? 10 minutes. Laura Horne.
James Mauldin from GPO responding…
Several years ago GPO considered handles and analyzed this process as a proof of concept. When GPO tried to convert sample PURL files to a handle and there were problems with the files getting too large and bogged down the handle system. GPO will have to decide what system they will use to migrate PURLS over to. According to James, they will have to go back to re-evaluate how GPO will migrate the PURLS into FDSys.
As for LOCKSS, GPO did a pilot project on this several years ago. They are considering another pilot with James Jacobs to distribute files for libraries to download. For this pilot, they are considering different systems, including LOCKSS.
5. A couple DLC's ago, GPO mentioned there was an RFP for the digitization of the legacy collection. Part of the stipulation was the digitization would be done free of charge and GPO would receive a copy of the files. What is the status of this? 5 minutes. Jesse Silva.
As the Superintendent of Documents mentioned in his speech this morning, the RFP process failed to move forward. There was only one bidder throughout the process and after lengthy negotiations, the bidder withdrew its bid. GPO will consider suggestions from the FDLP community on how to alter the requests of the RFP for resubmission.
6. Has GPO received feedback on the file repository system? Is it considered essentially finished technically? Are there plans for changes to organization, searching, etc? 5 minutes. Cass Hartnett.
XXX from GPO responding…
The FDLP desktop will be discussed by Karen tomorrow, and will include information on the next update of the website, including a more advanced search feature. GPO recognizes that the current structure and drill downs are currently problematic. The items are indexed, but the searching is not very good currently.
Total: 45 minutes
I had some questions about the new reporting of PURL referral statistics and GPO's Karen Sieger answered them.
My question was whether the November and December 2009 PURL referral spreadsheets represent a new way of counting PURL referrals, since the spreadsheets contain many IP addresses which represent individual PCs rather than referral pages.
Karen referred to two pages on the FDLP Desktop (links below) and explained that some users' web browsers are not configured to report referring pages but represent user downloads. A data-mining librarian can go through one of the monthly spreadsheets to identify the IP addresses of staff PCs or web pages that are used to test PURL links and subtract them from the totals. Users who with IP addresses assigned on the fly through a wifi network can now be included in the count of users with some confidence under this arrangement.
Karen indicated that GPO is looking into automating the process to make it easier to generate reports for individual institutions.
Linking to Federal Resources Using Persistent Uniform Resource Locators (PURLs)
GPO Modifies PURL Referrals Reporting
I was glad to receive this explanation and supplemental material because PURL referral counts help us to measure the online usage of FDLP resources.
John A. Stevenson
Coordinator, Government Documents and Maps Processing UnitUniversity of Delaware Library181 S. College Ave.Newark, DE 19717-5267302 831-8671varken@UDel.edu